Test machine can't get updates

Trying to create a test XP machine for software and hardware installation
testing ONLY. I don't want it activated because after each test it gets
formatted so the 30 days without activation is fine & dandy.

Problem is that the machihne should be fully updated with all patches from
Windows Update prior to our testing our stuff but WIndows Update won't
budge... gives the "requires activation" annoynance.

We don't want to activate... don't want to up the counter on the activation
of this XP key, expecially since this testing will have to be done many many
times. And each and every time it's only for the few minutes it takes to
test our hardware/software installations scripts

So how the heck do test & toss machines get used Mr Wizard? We need the
Windows Update patches.

Thanks,

Those who respond aren't necessarily wizards. Did you know that
you don't have to update and that no AV is needed in Vista? The
one claim is being made and the other was vigorously presented
by a few newsgroup responders - wizards? - not! And yet, for a
usable response, you don't have to insist that it come from a wizard.
So you really have to evaluate useless from usable - wizard or not.

Fishy has recommended shavlik.com rather than windows update
for patches. She is a bona-fide non-wizard. That might work. Why
you can't slip-stream the updates in Windows setup puzzles me:
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=slipstream+Windows
or repeatedly restore an activated image? I am not a wizard.

"Voicesmith" <> wrote in message news:CC2D5EA9-F96D-4891-BFD4-...
> Trying to create a test XP machine for software and hardware installation
> testing ONLY. I don't want it activated because after each test it gets
> formatted so the 30 days without activation is fine & dandy.
>
> Problem is that the machihne should be fully updated with all patches from
> Windows Update prior to our testing our stuff but WIndows Update won't
> budge... gives the "requires activation" annoynance.
>
> We don't want to activate... don't want to up the counter on the activation
> of this XP key, expecially since this testing will have to be done many many
> times. And each and every time it's only for the few minutes it takes to
> test our hardware/software installations scripts
>
> So how the heck do test & toss machines get used Mr Wizard? We need the
> Windows Update patches.
>
> Thanks,
>

Guess I should have put the smilie after "Mr Wizard" to better show true
emotion . Bit confised though... yours is the only response I see... so
what are the others that you're mentioning? Must be missing something.. where
is Fishy's reply in the MS-GUIed forum wrapper?

Anyway. the test requirements are for XPSP2, not Vista so Vista info isn't a
problem or a need, thanks tho. (Maybe in three years or so Vista will be a
common corporate target when that day comes I'll keep it in mind. - no rags
please my Ferrari's been running Ultimate x64 RTM since December very
happily, but the need is for XP box testing)

As to using a VM that's what I ended up doing, alas. One bare bones &
activated, cloned to up that same key to an Oracle cliented instance, one
more off of that for thes test "box" So it killed an activation key, oh well
(Technically it should kill one for each... or so I thought to be "legal"
about it; If I'm wrong and one activated VM can be used in unlimited
instances fine with me . )

That at least gets the software side of testing done... but didn't I mention
Hardware testing? MS vmc files don't do SCSI cards and USB devices very
well. (Much touted VMWare player doess't do them liek a real box either).
And we really do want these clean each time.

Guess Ghost still has some life in it after all. How silly of me, the old
tricks are still the best ones as they say right?

Thanks Michael. And thanks to Fishy I guess... whatever they said seemed to
make you happy.


"Michael Jennings" wrote:

> Those who respond aren't necessarily wizards. Did you know that
> you don't have to update and that no AV is needed in Vista? The
> one claim is being made and the other was vigorously presented
> by a few newsgroup responders - wizards? - not! And yet, for a
> usable response, you don't have to insist that it come from a wizard.
> So you really have to evaluate useless from usable - wizard or not.
>
> Fishy has recommended shavlik.com rather than windows update
> for patches. She is a bona-fide non-wizard. That might work. Why
> you can't slip-stream the updates in Windows setup puzzles me:
> http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=slipstream+Windows
> or repeatedly restore an activated image? I am not a wizard.
>